PURPOSES: Fluorescence diagnosis induced by 5-aminolevulinic acid enables more thorough transurethral resection of superficial bladder carcinoma compared with conventional white light. We performed a prospective, single institution, randomized trial to investigate whether the residual tumor rate and long-term tumor recurrence can be decreased by fluorescence diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 301 patients underwenttransurethral resection of bladder tumors with white light or fluorescence diagnosis. Transurethral resection was repeated 5 to 6 weeks later to evaluate the residual tumor rate. To determine recurrence-free survival patient followup was performed every 3 months by white light cystoscopy and urine cytology. Recurrence-free survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients with superficial bladder carcinoma were available for efficacy analysis. The residual tumor rate was 25.2% in the white light arm versus 4.5% in the fluorescence diagnosis arm (p <0.0001). Median followup in the white light arm in 103 cases was 21.2 months (range 4 to 40) compared with 20.5 (range 3 to 40) in the 88 in the fluorescence diagnosis arm. Recurrence-free survival in the fluorescence diagnosis group was 89.6% after 12 and 24 months compared with 73.8% and 65.9%, respectively, in the white light group (p = 0.004). This superiority proved to be independent of risk group. The adjusted hazard ratio of fluorescence diagnosis versus white light transurethral resection was 0.33 (95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Fluorescence diagnosis is significantly superior to conventional white light transurethral resection with respect to the residual tumor rate and recurrence-free survival. The differences in recurrence-free survival imply that fluorescence diagnosis is a clinically relevant procedure for decreasing the number of tumor recurrences.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSES: Fluorescence diagnosis induced by 5-aminolevulinic acid enables more thorough transurethral resection of superficial bladder carcinoma compared with conventional white light. We performed a prospective, single institution, randomized trial to investigate whether the residual tumor rate and long-term tumor recurrence can be decreased by fluorescence diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 301 patients underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumors with white light or fluorescence diagnosis. Transurethral resection was repeated 5 to 6 weeks later to evaluate the residual tumor rate. To determine recurrence-free survival patient followup was performed every 3 months by white light cystoscopy and urine cytology. Recurrence-free survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients with superficial bladder carcinoma were available for efficacy analysis. The residual tumor rate was 25.2% in the white light arm versus 4.5% in the fluorescence diagnosis arm (p <0.0001). Median followup in the white light arm in 103 cases was 21.2 months (range 4 to 40) compared with 20.5 (range 3 to 40) in the 88 in the fluorescence diagnosis arm. Recurrence-free survival in the fluorescence diagnosis group was 89.6% after 12 and 24 months compared with 73.8% and 65.9%, respectively, in the white light group (p = 0.004). This superiority proved to be independent of risk group. The adjusted hazard ratio of fluorescence diagnosis versus white light transurethral resection was 0.33 (95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Fluorescence diagnosis is significantly superior to conventional white light transurethral resection with respect to the residual tumor rate and recurrence-free survival. The differences in recurrence-free survival imply that fluorescence diagnosis is a clinically relevant procedure for decreasing the number of tumor recurrences.
Authors: Wassim Kassouf; Ashish M Kamat; Alexander Zlotta; Bernard H Bochner; Ronald Moore; Alan So; Jonathan Izawa; Ricardo A Rendon; Louis Lacombe; Armen G Aprikian Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Wassim Kassouf; Samer L Traboulsi; Girish S Kulkarni; Rodney H Breau; Alexandre Zlotta; Andrew Fairey; Alan So; Louis Lacombe; Ricardo Rendon; Armen G Aprikian; D Robert Siemens; Jonathan I Izawa; Peter Black Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2015-10-13 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Richard T Bryan; Stuart I Collins; Mark C Daykin; Maurice P Zeegers; K K Cheng; D Michael A Wallace; Graham M Sole Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2010-06-01 Impact factor: 1.891
Authors: Peter Stanislaus; Dirk Zaak; Thomas Stadler; Stefan Tritschler; Ruth Knüchel; Christian G Stief; Alexander Karl Journal: World J Urol Date: 2010-06-26 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Wolfgang Otto; Maximilian Burger; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Andreas Blana; Wolfgang Roessler; Ruth Knuechel; Wolf F Wieland; Stefan Denzinger Journal: Clin Med Oncol Date: 2009-04-30